Thursday, July 26, 2007

Nifong Unqualified Apology

Mike Nifong made the following statement today in court:

The last 16 months have proven to be a difficult and painful journey for my family and myself. This has also been a difficult and painful journey for Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans, for their families, for Durham and the state of North Carolina.

We all need to heal. I believe, however, that this healing process cannot truly begin until all proceedings involving this matter are concluded and everyone is able to go forward.

I have resigned my position as Durham District Attorney as a part of this process.

I have read the report released by the attorney general, including his recitation of evidence that I did not have, obtained from his own investigation. I agree with the attorney general’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Evans commited any of the crimes for which they were indicted or any other crimes during the party that occurred on March 13 and 14 of 2006 at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.

Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Evans were entitled to the presumption of innocence when they were under indictment. Surely, they are entitled to more than that now as they go forward with the rest of their lives. And that is what the attorney general tried to give them in his declaration that they are innocent.

I have admitted on more than one occasion that I have made mistakes in the prosecution of these cases. For that, I sincerely apologize to Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty, Mr. Evans and to their families.

It is my hope that all of us can learn from the mistakes of this case, and that all of us can begin to move forward. It is my hope that we can start this process today. Thank you.

139 comments:

Anonymous
said...

I'm not sure that's unqualified. He's saying the AG had evidence that he himself did not have, as if it were delivered from the Hand of God himself. Needless to say, the evidence was there if only it had been looked for.

How is it possible that the special prosecutor (Davis?) is so obviously unprepared for this case? He looked like a complete bumbling idiot up there, admitted he had no clue as to what was going on, begged for help.... Cheshire, Cooney, Bannon must be having strokes watching this man fail. Did they drag this guy out of the nursing home last night or something?

We all need to heal. I believe, however, that this healing process cannot truly begin until all proceedings involving this matter are concluded and everyone is able to go forward.

Well, I know that my personal ability to heal would be immensely helped by Nifong going to jail for 30 days for contempt. Even better would be if the judge said something along those lines when sentencing him.

What a wonderland... He mentions there was no credible evidence but also mentions that he didn't have all information that the AG had... (somewhat as an excuse- IMO).

This doesn't make any sense- if there was NO credible evidence than he never had credible evidence- it doesn't matter what the AG uncovered. He is addmitting there was never evidence- I think he is just too stupid to realize this. Teach1975

Still the 88 For Hate have nothing to offer -- but their hate, their three-dimensional bigotry of race, class, and gender. Given the toxic political and ideological advocacy which now characterizes and increasingly defines Duke and other universities and colleges across the USA, it's time, as a FrontPage Magazine article proposes today, to consider revoking their tax exemptions, which are premissed on the idea of the exempted institutions' dedication to objective scholarship.

If they do, they should be forced to undergo psychiatric evaluation.Certainly it clears the way for lawsuits against certain MSM outlets and individuals(Murphy, NY Times etc.) the next time they open their mouths withthat "something happened" crap.

The AG had evidence Nifong didn't have? Like what, the alibi evidence that the defense attorneys begged Nifong to look at? The interview with Crystal Mangum that Nifong deliberately avoided for so many months?

Every bit of evidence that the AG had was available to Nifong, and it was available long before Nifong indicted anybody.

Yeah these Dems, just always want to heal. I wonder if he thought healing is what was needed when Nixon was caught breaking the law, or when Scooter Libby to was caught not breaking the law? I wonder if he thinks Tx needs healing in the case of Tom Delay not breaking the law?

The Dem move to politicize the criminal justice system is a serious danger to the country.

The reference to evidence which Nifong did not have is just today's version of the "something happened" dodge. For the next version we will probably have to wait for Nifong's memoirs; we can only hope that they are never published.

I want to know WHY he did it -- from his own mouth and in his own words. Period.

Cooper and the SPs had access to the same information that Nifong REFUSED TO ACCEPT. He made it clear he was not interested in ANY exculpatory information, and I want to know why -- from his mouth -- that was the case.

As many others will note and have noted, this is too little too late. This statement is made only when he faces a prison jumpsuit. When he was disbarred he made no such statement.

This statement could have been made (and should have been made) immediately after his first meeting with Brian Meehan on April 10, 2006. Instead he ruined innocent lives and ignored the truths he espoused today.

Yes he belongs in jail, but I believe the only way that will happen is federal charges for violation of civil rights. Even if he gets contempt and 30 days, that -- to me --- does not qualify as jail. Either the boys' attorneys file civil rights violations or Mikey walks.

I can accept his apology with all the sincerity it was offered with. But as the Rev. Al Sharpton explained after Imus apologized - his actions still have consequences. Lying to the court - the state of North Carolina - is not something that is redeemed or cleared with an apology. Bank robbers who apologize still do the time. So should Nifong. He abused the power of the state of NC to promote his personal ambitions at the expense of innocent people. That requires punishment.

It wasn't an apology at all. But what really ticks me off is that he continues to mispronounce Reade's last name. He says SEAL-igmann instead of SELL-igmann. You would think with all the time Nifong spent interviewing Reade, he would have learned how to pronounce his name!

Tom Delay didn't break the law? When did the decision come down? Or do your baseless words count more than the outcome of the case? (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt re: a not-guilty verdict in the Delay case, but I am almost sure I'd have known about it just as soon as it came down).

Further, was he claiming he was innocent or that he engaged in condcuct that broke the law shortly before the law was enacted?

Note that the players withdrew there motion for sanctions as a result of the apology.

Also, Nifong agreed that now there was no credible evidence. Some have asked, on what evidence did he indict -- the accuser's statement. That is evidence. Only problem is that it is not credible (and Nifong should have been able to figure that out through a proper investigation).

I know that some readers here will think that we'rebeating a dead horse, but I agree with everyone herethat I am surprised that the defense lawyers foundthis apology acceptable -- it is still sub-par by ordersof magnitude.

At the VERY least:

He should say that he unequivocally believes thatNOTHING HAPPENED. He should use the words of his ownlawyer and say that he made EGREGIOUS mistakes.

He should admit that withholding the DNA evidencewas not just a mistake, but a willful wrongdoing.

Like everyone else has said here, he is not sincere-- he is just trying to avoid being convicted on thecontempt of court charge (even if he is found guilty, I doubt that he will do jail time for this charge,)unfortunately.)

Yeah, like the way those damn Dems' Attorney General fired 8 US attorneys for not following their political parties' strategy on choice of prosecutions!

Oh, wait...

...those damn Dems' Attorney General fired 93 US attorneys for "not following their political parties' strategy on choice of prosecutions!"

No, wait, a minor correction... 92 were fired for "not following their political parties' strategy on choice of prosecutions". The other one was fired for being too close to indicting Bill Clinton's business partners for the business that Clinton was their partner in. Oh, no, wait again. Maybe it was only 91 -- there was the prosecutor who was in the process of indicting Rosty -- firing him sure bolluxed that prosecution.

Ok, sorry, I guess your statistics might just be credible. Following through the algebra, if, as you claim, eight of the 93 were fired as part of Clinton carrying out his campaign promises for prosecutorial priorities, and two were fired to obstruct their prosecutions of Clintons friends, business partners and political allies, that would leave 83 fired as cover for the firing of the two.

Remember when KC was busting people's chops -- not because they came down on the wrong side of the case without waiting for the facts -- but simply because Representatives, Senators, etc., didn't stop everything to get involved in an ongoing criminal prosecution, that the system handled anyway?

I am not at all surprised they withdrew the motion for sanctions. Makes a lot of sense after the apology. These guys want to move on. I wonder if a deal was struck before the hearing, i.e., Cooney or Bannon reached out to Nifong's lawyers and said "you know, there's a way for Mike to put at least some of this behind him...we'd be open to considering dismissing our motion if..."

Bill Anderson-You will never hear the truth from Nifong. The truth that he was using the students lives as pawns in his bizarre quest to become a famous D.A. is too much for him to admit. I will lay even money that Durham and North Carolina will continue to try to make all of this disapear.

In terms of apology the LAXers got what they wanted - more clearing of their names:

"I agree with the attorney general’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Evans commited any of the crimes for which they were indicted or any other crimes during the party that occurred on March 13 and 14 of 2006 at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.

Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Evans were entitled to the presumption of innocence when they were under indictment. Surely, they are entitled to more than that now as they go forward with the rest of their lives. And that is what the attorney general tried to give them in his declaration that they are innocent."

Whether Nifong could or should have done better, whether his actions were caused by malice or stupidity, are issues of interest to his former employers, the people of North Carolina. They may become important in future civil litigations against Nifong, but they're not of immediate interest to the former LAX defendants. And because they may affect the course of future litigation there's no way they could have gotten Nifong to admit to wrongdoing anyway.

But they got the part of what they could get that was most important to them.

ANd I doubt they gave up very much by dropping the monetary sanctions - if Nifong isn't broke from legal bills yet he will be long before they could have started trying to collect.

Like so many others, I'm glad he apologized and admitted that there was no case, but consider the "the AG had more evidence" line absurd.

Remember, he was there, in that courtroom, because he *HID EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE*. That makes his argument that the AG had more evidence absurd. Nifong hid the evidence he had. Also, the record is clear that Nifong worked hard to be able to claim ignorance. His bar defense was essentially that he never read anything (never read any case notes, never read defense filings, never read the DNA report...), so of course he didn't "know" the evidence the AG found -- HE NEVER WANTED IT!

The record is clear *based on his own defense* that he didn't try to learn what really happened. Therefore, arguing now that he didn't know is patently offensive.

1:50 Clearly you watch Bill O'Reilly enough to know that the initials SP might stand for something to him.What does that say about you?

Idiots like you are the people who listen to Howard Stern all day because you hate him so much. I'm sure you watch O'Reilly's show every night without missing a second while cursing him and squeezing your pillow.

Why do you people persist in trying to separate one big pile of crap (politicians) into two piles, one democrat and one republican. They both smell to high heaven. Can we leave politics out of this?? Some people are inherently bad, no matter the label. Let's concentrate on getting rid of the feckless stumblebum and his 88+ lackies.

Like many criminals, Nifong is only gradually comprehending the enormity of what he has done. His latest stateent is getting better, but it still has a ways to go, and I don't think it can be characterized as an "unqualified apology". Nifong didn't just make "mistakes". This implies mere negligence on his part. At a bare minimum, he acted in reckless disregard of the truth. But the reality is worse than that. His own lawyer admitted in te eithics hearing that he acted with willful blindness (which is treated the same as knowingly). And a case can (and perhaps should) be hade that he acted with intentional disregard of the truth. These are all much more culpable states of mind than the mere negligence Nifong's latest attempt at an apology implies.

For example, in the Federal system, the baseline sentence for killing someone is 10-16 months if it is done negligently, 27-51 months if recklessly, and 235 months up to the death penalty if it is done knowingly or intentionally.

No, I am not 1:50 PM, but I must apologize for the person who referred to you as an a-hole because, although I do not know what an a-hole is, I do not think that this appellation is a remark that one's mother would make while bottle feeding her infant, but I don't know all the mothers out there, so there may be some out there somewhere who would say something untoward toward their baby.

The way the judges seemed to be pro prosecution in all the hearings, I would expect as Michael and some of the others have said, he won't do time. I think this and apology to the court will get him the "Paris" treatment or less.

Let's see. If you ain't got no evidence and you are aware of this fact to the point that someone in conversation remembers your saying, "We're fucked." as regards this lack of evidence, and there is no evidence to the point that there is no evidence that something happened and you think that zero, naught, zilch, nothing added to zero, naught, zilch, nothing should equal nothing, but in Durham it doesn't; well, I'm reminded that the Roman Empire was incapable of the zero concept or its number system was, but this is a more modern time and trying people the old-fashion way should not mean going back to the Salem witch trials of the 1690's, but then the Duke administration and its assorted munskins brought the whole trial concept to at least the Macarthy era, so there has been some progress, but the zero concept is zero plus zero is zero, but obviously I'm not sure about this because we're not talking about math here, now, are we.

I found it interesting that Nifong's attorney, after Nifong's "heartfelt apology" went into a long motion to require a Jury Trial and Bill of Indictment.

A criminal contempt hearing is at best a "quasi-criminal" proceeding, punishable by only 30 days in jail in North Carolina. This is less than many petty offenses, and the right to a trial by jury is almost never afforded to someone subjected to less than 6 months in prison.

The request for a Bill of Indictment, which is a right afforded to felony defendants, is even more bizarre. I have never seen or heard of anyone asking for such relief anywhere in America. That could be why Nifong's lawyer did not turn over the motion to the defense attorneys until 5 minutes AFTER the hearing had started!

Nifong and his attorneys should be sanctioned for filing a frivolous pleading. _______________

If you watched Nifong closely during the hearing, and especially during his "apology," you would have noticed that he was sending morse code signals to the enablers with his spastically blinking eyes. I intercepted the last part of the message, which provided:

I wish a North Carolina attorney would get on K.C.'s board and answer this question: Can a NC Judge "stack" contempt sanctions against one defendant?

By "stacking," I mean: Can a Judge order Nifong to serve consecutive 30-day sentences and pay multiple fines for actions taken in one case?

There were many counts of contempt filed by the defense attorneys. They gave up those counts for a good reason. I think the good reason is that Nifong agreed to

1. Apologize;

2. Admit the boys were "innocent;" and

3. Point the finger at the DPD ("evidence that I did not have") for purposes of the future civil lawsuit.

Yet, my wonderment at reaching this agreement would be lessened if I knew that a NC Judge could not "stack" contempt sanctions. In other words, why bother with multiple counts if all you could get would be one set of sanctions (i.e. 30 days hard, $500 large).

It is also more proof that the Duke Three and their families have more grace than I will ever hear about in my lifetime.

________________

For Harry Potter fans: (If you are not a Harry Potter fan, please skip this) --

We can kill Lord Voldefong, but until his horcruxes are destroyed, including the Gang of 88, the Herald-Sun, the NYT, the internet enablers, the DPD, et al., then He-Who-Must-Not-Practice-Law will still live on.

_________________

The Cavemen were wont to live in communal settings and had little knowledge of potential genetic complications until K.C. Johnson spoke to them about "family units." He got his best results that day when he said to a blushing Carg, "Stop kissing her, she's your damn sister." From: Cave Wall Drawing, Australia. MOO! Gregory

...What exactly can the families "learn from this case." Why does Nifong lump them all together?::I suspect that all families of white male athletes have learned that if you send your kid to Duke University where Paula (screw due process) McClain has been invited to give a convocation address this year...it would be best to have an attorney or two ...on retainer.

People are trying to figure Nifong out. They ask why would Nifong want to put 3 innocent young men in prison for most of there lives?The answer is very simple. Nifong is a sociopath, devoid of feelings or conscience.

I believe what the "families can learn from this" according to Nifong's coded language, is that if the young men hadn't been rich, white, drinking, and ordering strippers, "the something that happened in the house wouldn't have happened." But it did, and now you should learn a lesson from all this.

"I have admitted on more than one occasion that I have made mistakes in the prosecution of these cases."

This was an unqualified apology?

Perhaps I am a little naive but framing three innocent students is a bit more than a simple prosecutorial mistake. Until Nifong admits he knowingly prosecuted these students without a shred of credible evidence and asks for their forgiveness, he will be the subject of ridicule.

His failure to come to grips with his despicable actions indicates the lack of any true remorse.

instead of the "evidence I did not have" dance...we would like to have heard "evidence I refused to consider" and evidence I refused to review because of my incredible laziness and shoddiness and corrupt motives so that there were many "documents I failed to read, study, absorb and also disclose."

To: the gallery,The temptation to make this case a ccosmic issue seems to be running high again.Perhaps we could give a moratorium to attacking one's political beliefs and engage in discussion again.This is mainly about the Duke Hoax not caling people "Maroons". Corwin

On WRAL.com they say in the video that the "i am soory" was planned so that he would not have to pay some $ to the families for their defense. What a SLIME ball!! I feel for his son and I hope he does not go to school anywhere near Durham. I wonder if coach Pressler can sue him as well.

4:43Yes, he said "I'm sorry" only so he didn't have to pay their legal defense costs, not because he wanted to. It was pre-negotiated, of course. But think of it this way: He had to because the defense attorneys have a studded dog collar on him and they just yanked the choke chain. He has nowhere to go. "Heel, you bastard!Heel!."

How can this guy get off saying how he and his family has suffered for 16 months. For most of that time, he was the media darling, reveling in the attention and the "million dollars in free advertising". His suffering is recent and entirely self inflicted. How can he possibly equate his suffering to that of the falsely accused young men? I do not believe there was a pot banging demonstration in front of his house with signs calling for his castration. I do not believe he had to walk a gauntlet of taunts and smears as he entered the courtroom for his bar hearing or today. I do not believe he was subjected to death threats in the courtroom at his bar hearing or today. He is a whining weasel and I will bet my last dollar that his "apology was motivated purely by self interest.

"Was the NC AG able to obtain evidence that was un-obtainable by Nifong and his assistants ? Seems like Mr Nifong is still attempting to avoid the truth"

You hit the nail on the head. What Cooper was able to obtain was the truth. It was there. Mikey just tried a little too hard to cover it up.

When my children were little and did something to someone that they should not have done, I would make them apologize. If mine had apologized like Mikey did, they would have faced the wrath of the belt upon returning home. Mikey is hoping not to face his punishment. Maybe Mikey, Lienerd Wilson, the Gang 88, Getalie, and Highman can be locked in a room with Broadrot and Burness and be forced to listen to the AG's press conference every hour on the hour. They should be made to remain together for 30 years (10 for each railroaded young man). Sounds reasonable to me.

Well, what is really at issue now that Nifong has been so rightly disgraced is the mind-set of political correctness that allowed this whole affair to be pursued in the manner in which it was pursued, that is to say, tongue in cheek, without justice in mind or heart.

I could have a little faith in the justice system if Nifang went to prison for 2 years. 30 days is a gift for all the laws he broke and all the criminal damage he caused to the 3 young men, Durham and the United States. This debacle was followed around the world, don't forget!

Ken - Dallas 4:59 said... ,,,DIW:..."including his recitation of evidence that I did not have"

...Does anyone know, prior to the indictments, what evidence did Nifong not have?::It appears that Nifong did not conduct in-depth interviews of anyone and then he did not read the interviews that were conducted by the DPD.

It was almost as if he was waiting for a mystery witness to show up.::GP

First, the dopes parroting the talking points about how "Clinton did it too!" about the US Attorney scandal need to turn off the Fox News for a while and learn something. Hopefully that will help them to avoid looking like idiots in the future.

Second, Nifong's "apology" is still less than satisfactory. He's admitted that the three defendants committed no crimes at the party. What he NEEDS to say is that NO ONE committed ANY crimes at the party. In other words - NOTHING HAPPENED.

To Michael and Mr. 6:04.Astually, the ex-DA did NOT say that the Duke 3 were innocent of ALL crimes. He only said they were innocent of the crimes with which they were CHARGED. "Something happened,: eh Mr. ex-DA?

If you check the clip, I think you'll hear that Nifong added "....or any other crimes against Ms Mangum" (or similar phrase).

But, as 6:04 says, he didn't admit that NOBODY assaulted her, or that NOTHING HAPPENED. And, I believe he only said that he agrees there's "no credible evidence of" such crimes, which is something short of saying they DIDN'T HAPPEN.

We can parse it til doomsday, but Nifong is never going to come clean anyway.

This is a vast improvement over his non-apology apology but I'm not sure it's sincere.

Now we are led to believe that the lightbulb went on over Mike's head after he read the AG's report and he suddenly realized there was no credible evidence. That sounds like BS to me. His behavior throughout this mess indicates he knew all along that there was no credible evidence and he just didn't care. He certainly knew there was exculpatory evidnce as well since he went to great lengths to hide it.

Does he care now and is he genuinely sorry? I doubt it. The more probable explanation is that he knows his big fat butt is on the line and it's time to pull out all the stops. Apologies, tears, references to family and friends and so on. With jail potentially in the mix it's time to trot out everything in his bag of tricks.

I agree with Bill Anderson... I want to hear from Nifong's mouth WHY he charged forward with this case.I am disappointed the families are letting him off the hook. But, I am sure they want to get on with their own lives.

Also, the line "they were entitled to the presumption ofinnocence under indictment", that line actually getsme mad. They were entitled to the presumption of"innocent until proven guilty" the second the accusermade the charges. They deserved an actual investigation, as opposed to a charade and paradeof intimidating witnesses into false statements ANDmost important of all,they should NOT have even been indicted. He totally misledthe Grand Jury and kept information from them.

First, the dopes parroting the talking points about how "Clinton did it too!" about the US Attorney scandal need to turn off the Fox News for a while and learn something. Hopefully that will help them to avoid looking like idiots in the future.

Please provide more detailed information. Such as links. Because I really want to know how Clinton's firing actions are any different. Back it up, or STFU.

He starts out by using his family as a propand first talks about his own painful journey (andthat of his family) HE was the cause of the pain!! He did this to himself! Anybody with an ounce of abrain could of, and should of, concluded fairlyquickly with any semblance of a real policeinvestigation that she made the whole thing up.

He talks about a painful journey.Prior to being disbarred, what pain did he suffer?

I don't have the time to read through all of the comments to this thread, and apologize in advance if I'm repeating others' comments, but I have to say it: Nifong is offering up weasel-words.

Nifong said: "I agree with the attorney general’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Evans commited any of the crimes for which they were indicted or any other crimes during the party that occurred on March 13 and 14 of 2006 at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd."

He isn't going far enough. The only thing that "happened," the only crime that occurred on the night in question is that A DRUNKEN, DRUGGED-OUT HOOKER MADE A FALSE ALLEGATION OF RAPE. That's the ONLY THING THAT HAPPENED.

Why the hell can't these losers get it together to tell the truth.

Crystal Mangum needs to be arrested, charged and put on trial for her crimes.

>I agree with the attorney general’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Evans commited any of the crimes for which they were indicted or any other crimes during the party that occurred on March 13 and 14 of 2006 at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.<

The attorney general is privy to the same LACK of evidence as Nifong was privy to. So, if Nifong now agrees that there is no credible evidence of the crimes, why then did he tried to frame the students before his election?

Of course, it's not like having the evidence would justify Nifong framing the students. But, by squaring what Nifong said today with what he did last year, it shows that he was trying to frame these students even though he already knew that they were innocent.

I'll give you -- this was better than his previous 2 apologies however "unqualified"?

"I have read the report released by the attorney general, including his recitation of evidence that I did not have, obtained from his own investigation."

Should have been...

"I have read the report released by the attorney general, including his recitation of evidence that I did not have. Had I properly performed my duties as a minister of justice I would not have hidden exculpatory evidence from the defendants for 9 months and I would have demanded a full and fair investigation into the allegations securing the evidence the AG ultimately uncovered."

8:16 - it's routine for Presidents to do a mass purge of the US Attorneys at the beginning of their term, because they "serve at the pleasure of the President" and he's not the guy that hired them. That's precisely what Clinton did (and Bush I did, and Reagan did, etc etc).

What Bush did is fire the same guys he'd previously approved because various right-wingers felt they were being insufficiently partisan. For an office where they are SUPPOSED to act in a nonpartisan manner.

THAT is unprecedented. And now they lie about it (see Gonzo's latest adventure in front of Congress for the most recent example), and dumbasses like you keep repeating the Fox News talking points that you got from Rush or some other right-wing blowhard without ever realizing that you don't have a damned clue.

Question: Who's going to wind up going down harder, Nifong or Gonzales? (Ok, that's too easy, because even if they can find someone to investigate Gonzo, Bush will just wind up pardoning him.)

Just three months ago, while defending his misdeeds in front of the disbarment panel, Nifong explained that he still believed "something" happened in that bathroom. What changed between then and now - other than that he is now already disbarred and risks jail time, and is better served by singing a different tune?

Let's face it, Nifong tried framing those students for the same reason that he is now apologizing to them: to serve his own self interest. Had he succeeded in framing those students so that they are in jail, I’d bet my next week’s pay that he would not be proclaiming their innocence.

this is a non apology made on the legal advice of his attorney to try to get a more lenient sentence. notice how he never says no crime was committed but rather that the no evidence exists that the three defendants committed said crime. there is a difference. and he needn't have bothered as the defense wants his total destruction and will not stop at nothing less.

As an attorney in NC, who has experienced dishonest DAs regularly, I would point out this is a qualified apology. Nifong says the Attorney General had access to facts he did not. More qualification for his dishonesty, more of the same, more it is someone elses's fault-----.

Yes, firing US attorneys at the beginning of the term is far different than targeting 8 specific attorneys who are actively seeking indictments against Republicans and/or have found that the evidence doesn't add up to charge various different Democrats with crimes similar to those of Tom Delay.

Further, anyone who says that perjury is not a crime simply because the investigation in which Scooter Libby perjured himself simply doesn't know what perjury means.

Perjury is lying under oath, not lying under oath when the investigation you lied during finds an underlying crime.

I agree with the Libby jury (who found him guilty after a trial involving Libby's defense by some of the best criminal defense lawyers in the country) that things seem more fair when there is an underlying crime... but the whole point of an investigation is that there may have been an underlying crime, and we have to figure it all out.

Nifong didn't admit that no crime was committed, all he did was admit that there was no evidence that Seligman, Finnerty and Evans committed a crime.

Look folks, he's still saying that "something happened," he just is now admitting that there's no evidence that the men he framed participated in it.

Until I hear from Nifong himself that the only crime that happened that night was that a drunk, drugged-out hooker violated her parole and filed false allegations of rape, kidnapping and sexual assault, I'm not going to be satisfied that Nifong is truly repentant.

Nifong needs to see jail time, and not just some measly 30 days. IMHO he should serve years, not days.

Let's be a little more sophisticated in looking at Presidential appointees.

I was in the govmint for 25 years, including during the Clinton years. I worked up cases of fraud for my agency. These were then presented to the appropriate US attorney for prosecution. I had a great case in Boston involving millions of dollars. It was a "non starter" because of the people involved. There was a serious public safety case that was on hold for 2+ years until the Clinton appointees resigned. It was successfully prosecuted subsequently.

It was clearly understood and known that certain people and organizations were NEVER going to be indicted because of "special interests" of the prevailing administration. So we, the work a day civil servants learned, just don't even bother.

The Clinton administration was full of corrupt appointees (remember Espy?). 9/11 was one of their happier days as the FBI dropped a zillion cases being developed to focus on terrorism issues.

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review